Column XXXVII

The Great Isaiah Scroll 43:20 to 43:23

This is the 1st page of 4 in the 12th strip of leather that
makes up
the scroll. The usual size of the strips of leather hold 3 pages.
This
then is an exception. The good order of the seam that binds the
scroll
at the right is easily seen, There is a similar split on this
page to the
one on the preceding page on the right side of the scroll
extending from
lines 13 to 22. No letters are obscured by the split but there is
a blemish
crossing the split on line 20 that extends diagonally to the left
into
the next line. Three letters are obscured by this blemish, i.e..
the final
"he" of "tirzah" and the initial waw and aleph of "ve- 'elon" The
line
that looks somewhat like a seam at the left will be described on
the next
page.

Easy reading:

This page and the next one (38) are easy reading. Isaiah
has some
very difficult Hebrew constructions with succinctness, among
other things,
making it difficult for even an accomplished reader to be sure he
has gained
the full sense. If you can read narrative material like Genesis
and the
historical books, which is much easier reading than Psalms or the
prophets,
then try your hand at these two pages and you will be surprised
to see
you can progress through them with a little help. To see the
difference
try reading page 39 after reading these two pages. The level of
difficulty
will become immediately obvious.

Paragraphs and Spatiums:

Paragraphs are indicated by an indentation in line 2 =
43 22;
and by the preceding line being left unfilled in line 8 = 44:2
and in line
12 = 44: 6 and in line 27 = 44:21; and in line 29 = 4:22.
Spatiums mark each of the last verses in chapter 43 in lines
4, 5,
and 6 where vss 25, 26, and 27 are set apart as separate
statements. An
X in the margin also marks the importance of this section to an
editor.
An unusually large spatium marks the beginning of Chapter 44 in
line 7
which is also a short verse set off as a paragraph in itself. The
first
7 words of line 8 end at a spatium which is the middle of verse
2. The
spatium there does divide two clauses but they are related. There
are also
spatiums on .line 15 + vs 44:9 and line 17 = 44:12; and line 18 =
44:13
and line 23 = 44:18.

Editorial marks:

There is an X to the left of 43:26 in line 5 which emphasizes
the editors
evaluation of the importance of the verse or section.. The
scribal mark
that looks like a derby hat under the X belongs to the next page
as do
other horizontal marks in the left margin. The horizontal line in
line
7 at the right completes the section marked which began in line
26 of the
preceding page.

Editorial additions to the text:

The word "ken" (thus or so) is added by an editor to vs
44:3 after
the 8th word in line 9. It is not found in M. A 3mpl pronoun
"hem" spelled
"hemah" is added above line 15 toward the end to correct the
text. It was
an omission by the Q scribe. In line 18 over the 8th word a waw
was added
but appears to have been crossed out. In line 22 after the 1st
word an
editor has added the word "ve- 'al" (and with or and about) to
correct
an omission but he adds a conj waw not in M.

Q Scribal Spelling:

Addition of an aleph to short words ending in yod has
already
been pointed out. This sometimes causes confusion since "lo" (to
him) with
aleph added looks like "lo' " (not) and "bo" (in him) looks like
"bo' "
(come or go). An example is in line 7: last word where prep + suf
is meant
while it looks like come or go. Another example of the same is in
line
2 : 5th and 7th words, where "kiy" and "biy" both have aleph
appended.
See also the introduction where addition
of Aleph and "He" are given further treatment

Line 23: first word: Q = "le-bilayv" (for his tree trunk)
not in M but M = "lepeslo" (for his idol)
Line 24: last word: Q has a redundant word repeating
"to say"
Line 25: last word: M = "lebal" Q = "lebaluiy" probably the same word as the first in line 23, (for his tree trunk.)
Line 26: 2nd word: This is a good example of poor copying by the scribe since it is obvious from context that 'esgor and not 'esgod is required here. The scribe has written an obvious daleth where resh is required. This seems to be more evidence of a scribe copying from another text and of not listening to a reader. Most mistakes in Q seem to support that.
Line 27: next to last word: Q = tis'aniy, possibly you shall not be taken up (out of the way). and M = tinnashe:niy; you will not be forgotten by me